Skip to main content

About your Search

Search Results 0 to 7 of about 8 (some duplicates have been removed)
Oct 3, 2012 3:30am PDT
law and sunshine ordinance and we're given the run around over illegal elections. there's millions of dollars being stolen by the councils, the residence councils. it's off the hook and nobody talks about it. i want to mention a couple of points on the rush through this process here. there's a pattern of rushing through the process. when the sunshine task force didn't have one member who is disables, they stop and when the ethics commission has miss mean ors going on and the meeting is not properly agendaed and ada violations are going on you have an obligation to stop the meeting until corrections can be made or you are under liability for ada lawsuit. this should be elementary in san francisco and in closure i want to come back to did you remove proceedings in the charter from the deal from the final document from fifteen dot one zero five? did i get that right? a. we haven't taken any action. speaker: okay thank you so much. this removal from office really needs to come forward especially when there's such an unequal application in the laws in this city. thanks. speaker: i'm not
Oct 3, 2012 4:00am PDT
of resources no non filers were being turned over and state laws and authorities are clearer than ours is because this is a state law. however, this wasn't being done so i failed to follow-up and make sure that my directions were being followed and in fact, the practice is to send a letter to filing and then to send a second follow-up letter. when the second letters came from my signature it was already mid-august and i thought it was done months ago and that's my failure to follow through on that and i'm taking full responsibility for that but the practice should be and in the future will be that first we send people late letters and we can assign them up to ten dollars a day for being late. beyond a certain amount of time beyond that we have to assume they don't intend to file and that's when we should be doing referrals but it shouldn't take six months speaker: i /paoerb that and i appreciate what life is like really on the ground /skpw taking responsibility for it. the back and forth of writing to somebody remains private and if they are tossing all the letters then we're stuck in
Oct 1, 2012 3:30pm PDT
the right to return would be extended to residents that are considered by existing law to be displaced temporary or permanently. add the term "comparable to the definition of, "replacement units." this change is accepted and revised in order to mintain consistency with federal law. remove "relocation apeas board," references. this change is accepted in two parts. for the purposes of he relocation plan review, the appeals reference was removed and replaced with "the city funding agency." any project that is funded by a city agency will require that agency to review the relocation plan for compliance with local polices and issue a non-binding advisory statement. all relocation claim appeals will be heard about an administrative law just from the rent stabilization and arbitration board. language was added in order to authorize the board to conduct hearings. and time change public housing development project definition to "hope sf public housing development project." this change was not accepted. it's the goal of the legislation to provide the right to return to all public housing reside
Sep 30, 2012 9:30pm PDT
six nine nine dash one three applies only to the ethics laws and not to the public access laws as was held in the allen gross man verses san francisco ethics commission memorandum of points and authorities petition for preemptory mandate october fifth 2009 which was settled in mr. gross man's favor, c3 dot six nine nine dash thirteen was relied on by both the controllers office and by the ethics commissioner mr. saint c r o y as being their main claim that they had an exception but it is not upheld by [indiscernible] and the majority of their case plied on this and because of that i am going to repeat what i said in public comment of this meeting tonight that i don't believe this matter should be before you whatsoever for a number of reasons which i'll get to. speaker: mr. shaw the other thing i've realized is that the city attorney hasn't had an opportunity to review it either and it's not his fault and me not reviewing it is my fault. speaker: it's not entirely your fault because of the timeline speaker: mr. shaw let me finish. i don't think it fair to you or fair to the proc
Search Results 0 to 7 of about 8 (some duplicates have been removed)